3种检测方法在出血热病原检测中的应用效果比较  

Comparison of the application effect of three methods in laboratory detection of hemorrhagic fever

作　　者：魏卓超 张巍[1] 隋丹[1] 邓晓丽[1] 王盛[1] WEI Zhuo-chao;ZHANG Wei;SUI Dan;DENG Xiao-li;WANG Sheng(Anshan Center for Disease Control and Prevention,Anshan 114000,China)

机构地区：[1]鞍山市疾病预防控制中心,辽宁鞍山114000

出　　处：《中华卫生杀虫药械》2020年第6期556-559,共4页Chinese Journal of Hygienic Insecticides and Equipments

摘　　要：目的探究3种检测方法在出血热病原检测中的实际应用效果,为出血热防控提供科学准确的检测数据。方法参照《全国肾综合征出血热监测方案(试行)》中的检测方法,以免疫荧光法(IFA)、酶联免疫吸附实验(ELISA)法、实时荧光定量PCR(RT-PCR)法对2018—2019年鞍山市国家级监测点采集的宿主动物标本进行检测。结果利用IFA法在400份鼠肺标本中共检出30份鼠肺抗原阳性,带毒率为7.5%;用ELISA法在400份鼠血标本中共检出41份鼠血总抗体阳性,鼠感染率为10.25%;用RT-PCR法检测400份鼠肺标本,检出22株出血热阳性,4份灰区,PCR法阳性率为5.5%;3种方法两两配对卡方检验,对IFA法和ELISA法结果进行比较,差异无统计学意义(χa^2=3.70,P>0.05),将PCR法分别与IFA法和ELISA法的结果比较,差异有统计学意义(χb^2=4.08,χc^2=12.96,P<0.05);对3种方法进行筛选试验,RT-PCR法灵敏度和特异度更高。结论 3种方法各有特点,IFA法适合初步筛查性工作,ELISA法检测时间较短,RT-PCR方法较为精准。Objective To explore the practical application effect of the three detection methods for the pathogen of hemorrhagic fever,and to provide scientific and accurate detection data for the prevention and control of hemorrhagic fever.Methods According to the detection method in the "National Monitoring Program for Hemorrhagic Fever with Renal syndrome(Trial)",immunofluorescence(IFA),enzyme linked immunosorbent assay(ELISA) and real-time fluorescence quantitative PCR(RT-PCR) were employed to detect the host animal samples collected from a national monitoring site in Anshan City in northeast China in 2018 and 2019.Results 30 out of 400 lung samples were positive for mouse lung antigen by IFA method,with the virus carrying rate of 7.5%;41 of 400 mouse blood samples were tested antibody positive with ELISA method with the infection rate of 10.25%;RT-PCR method was used to detect the lungs of 400 mice,22 strains of hemorrhagic fever and 4 gray areas were detected,with the positive rate of 5.5%.The three methods were paired with chi-square test,and there was no statistically significant difference between IFA and ELISA(χa^2=3.70,P>0.05).The result of PCR showed statistically significant difference with that of IFA and that of ELISA(χb^2=4.08,χc^2=12.96,P<0.05).Of the three methods,RT-PCR method displayed higher sensitivity and specificity.Conclusion The three methods have their own characteristics:IFA method for primary screening,Elisa method for short detection time,and RT-PCR method for more accurate.

关 键 词：出血热 免疫荧光法 酶联免疫吸附实验(ELISA) 实时荧光定量PCR(RT-PCR) 

分 类 号：R184.3[医药卫生—流行病学] R183.5[医药卫生—公共卫生与预防医学]